1 comment:

They're basically right given McCain's willing approval of the ridick bank bailout bill and his wonderful plan to bail out all the mortgage holders in this country too.

FWIW I did not weigh in on the taxes debate previously but I agree and disagree. I agree whole heartedly that the truly rich should have a responsibility to help take care of the unprivileged to some extent.

But #1 I disagree that 250k is the right cutoff for that threshhold. I can solemnly guarantee you that a normal family of 4 making 250k in any of the metro areas I have lived in (Boston, New York, Washington DC) or much of metropolitan Northern and Southern California is not considered to be truly "rich" given the cost of living in those areas. I'm not trying to say that you're poor or anything close to poor if you're making a quarter mil obviously, but you're nowhere near rich in those areas. In Manhattan for example, you are literally eligible for financial aid for private schools all across the city if your household income is under 350k. No way in my view a family that needs financial aid cuz they can't afford to send their kids to a decent school in the city is so rich that more of their income should be taken and redistributed to the poor.

#2 I also think there needs to be a mention of timing in the decision to increase income redistribution. My personal belief is that right now with the economic situation what it is in the country and the world, increasing taxes on the truly rich, and in particular on big businesses, will have a devastating effect on the country's ability to recover economically. I would have been much more in favor of Obama's redistribution initiative under Bill Clinton in the true boom days ten years ago. Or even three or four years ago I could see this making more sense. To me, blind increases in income redistribution have a smart time and place, and this just doesn't seem like it.

Loved the post though as usual. You can stir shit up with the best of em.